Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
are in the majority, it's a little bit of a greater responsibility. harry reid has to make the decision whether or not to bring these bills to the floor. there are marginal members in his caucus that might not want to take these issues up. he is responsible for them in some sense. i do believe the mayor is very much involved in this issue. we've been spending a lot of time lobbying members of congress, members of the senate on both republicans and democrats. i do believe that the senate is going to take these issues up. i do believe harry reid is going to bring comprehensive gun bill to the floor. maybe in different pieces. it may be one package. that will be his decision. i do believe something is going to pass in a bipartisan way out of the senate. you saw politico reporting there was a bipartisan group, republicans and democrats from rural and urban states who are working on a comprehensive package on a background checks. i thinkure going to see something get through the senate, and then i think you will have house republicans -- not the majority of them. some number. 20, 30, 40. who will be
things coming out of harry reid. what about the assault weapon ban and the likelihood of that or is your focus more on handgun control and the gun trafficking bill? >> our focus here is the gun trafficking bill. and let me tell you why. i'm a strong supporter of the other provisions that you just talked about. machine guns and assault weapons and clips, high capacity clips. but this is something that we've gotten republicans to agree with us on. in other words, this is the first time in a long time in the house where we've got co-sponsorship with republicans. and we had two yesterday and now we've added another three. and we expect that before it's all over, we'll have quite a few folks on both sides of the aisle and we'll have a bipartisan bill. another thing that's significant about this. you spent a lot of time looking at "fast and furious." during the "fast and furious" hearings, the atf officers who came to testify before us basically begged us to create a drug trafficking law. because basically what they were saying is that it was almost impossible for them to get convictions of th
-in-chief. but democrats suggest that they're doing the country a disservice, near is harry reid. >> and press center unwarranted to stop or attempt to try to stop the secretary of defense and the cia director. we need the men and women need the secretary of defense, chuck hagel's imminently qualified to be that secretary of defense. >> and jack reed of rhode island and the senate armed services committee postponed a vote on hagel until this week and it could come up as early as this coming week, harris. >> anybody who thought this issue was going away, woefully underestimated it. steve centanni, part of the opposition of john brennan to head the cia is his role in creating a controversial drone program. it targets the suspected terrorists including those who and reveals that americans overseas can be targeted for killing without any kind of court order. officials simply have to determine that that person is a terror leader and a serious threat to the united states, and then it would be too dangerous to try to capture that person. tonight, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle speaking out about the i
eternal. the president can sit down with harry reid tonight and work with senate democrats who have the majority in the senate to move a bill. it's time for them to act. i've made this clear for months now. and yet we've seen nothing. >> now, he wants them, senator, to move legislation that passed in the last congress. the last congress is irrelevant right now. you need new legislation in order to pass a bill. >> wolf, what's not irrelevant is last congress we had the tax increase. so now it's spending cut time. the president doesn't want to to the spending cut. we had the tax increase -- >> right now, to avert this fiscal crisis we have right now, these forced spending cuts, you need a new bill. you can't use a bill from the old congress. >> the president -- you know what, and i think scott walker, the wisconsin governor, said it, let the president come out and say, here's where we're going to cut $85 billion in spending. the bottom line is the president doesn't want to cut spending. it's $16 trillion in debt. he doesn't want to cut spending. >> he does want to cut spending but he
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)